《Table 3.Comparison of China’s Coping Strategies for IP Provisions under the TPP》

  提示：宽带有限、当前游客访问压缩模式

本系列图表出处文件名：随高清版一同展现

《How to Evaluate and Respond to IP Provisions under the TPP》

1. 获取 高清版本忘记账户？点击这里登录

1. 下载图表忘记账户？点击这里登录

Therefore，whatever China may choose as its coping strategy，its level of IPR protection should be above that of the TRIPS.However，this does not mean that China is incapable of responding to the TPP or has no choice but to passively accept the new regulations established under the TPP.Now that the minimum level has been established，China’s coping alternatives can be categorized along two dimensions（IPR protection level and implementation approach）into the following six strategies，as listed in Table 3.Among them，O1，I1，and II1 are unilateral strategies that China can implement without involving international cooperation.In comparison，Strategies O2，I2，and II2 are multilateral ones，whose implementation requires international consultations and cooperation.In terms of IPR protection level，Strategies O1 and O2 retain the regulations and standards existing under the TRIPS，Strategies I1 and I2 comply with the regulations and standards established under the TPP，and Strategies II1 and II2 involve IPR protection frameworks with higher levels of protection than the existing TRIPS levels but remain outside the TPP framework.